Special Tests: Cervical Radiculopathy, Cervicogenic Headache, and Canadian C-spine Rules

Special Tests Covered in this Lesson:

• Wainner's Clinical Prediction Rule for Cervical Radiculopathy
  • Spurling's Compression Test
  • Upper Limb Tension Test
  • Distraction Test
  • Less than 60° of rotation on the affected side
    • Additional Radiculopathy Test
      • Shoulder Abduction Test
• Cervicogenic Headache
  • Cervical Flexion and Rotation Test
• Red Flags
  • Canadian C-spine Rules

Radiculopathy and cervicogenic headache are relatively common symptom clusters correlated with chronic and acute cervical spine dysfunction. For example, long hours behind a desk with forward head postures, and whiplash syndrome following a car accident, can result in symptoms that match these diagnoses. Often patient complaints include the feeling of a "pinched nerve" with lateral bending (lateral flexion) or axial compression. Or, they may mention that their headache and neck symptoms tend to get worse at the same time, and sometimes "massage" aids in reducing their symptoms. In more serious cases nerve root compression (for example, with herniated disk) can result in radicular symptoms and muscle weakness. Both cervical radiculopathy and cervicogenic headache can be reliability assessed using the special tests covered in this course. For more serious issues that may imply a need for emergency care, the Canadian C-spine rules have demonstrated high sensitivity and utility in clinical practice. For example, fear of moving the neck and significant muscle weakness should imply a recommendation to visit an emergency room.

Summary:

The special tests that demonstrate an acceptable level of accuracy for the cervical spine focus on just a few diagnoses, and likely miss the most common cervical complaints. Radiculopathy, cervicogenic headache, and screening for necessary imaging are covered in this course. These diagnoses do not include the common complaints of mechanical/postural chronic neck pain. Clinical experience and a comprehensive subjective examination will likely dictate whether the testing below is necessary. The most accurate tests, based on available research, were chosen for each potential diagnosis.

• Cervical Radiculopathy: Generally, cervical radiculopathy tests are more specific than sensitive. For example, the Wainner's Clinical Prediction Rule (CPR), a cluster of radiculopathy tests, demonstrates very high specificity but low sensitivity (12). This is a little odd considering this CPR includes the Upper Limb Tension Tests (ULTTs) which have high sensitivity. Alternatively, the ULTTs exhibit relatively high sensitivity and low specificity (4, 6, 12, 15, 16 - 19), which may imply they are a useful screen for diagnoses such as "nerve pain", "radicular symptoms", or "nerve root irritation". Note, Wainner's CPR is more accurate than the use of axial compression, distraction, or lateral bending tests alone.
• Cervicogenic Headache: Cervicogenic headache is a diagnosis that licensed human movement professionals should give more attention to. The prevalence of cervicogenic headache is relatively common; however, it seems these patients are not referred to licensed human movement professionals often. There is one particular test that demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity for this diagnosis (21 - 25).
• Red Flags: Canadian C-spine Rules are important for identifying "red flag" conditions (spinal cord injury, emergent need for spine surgery, muscle weakness (neurological motor loss, etc.) that should be referred out for imaging and additional diagnostics before intervention is attempted. These rules are highly-sensitive, which is ideal for a screen of this type (26 - 30)

Brookbush Institute Recommendation:

• The Brookbush Institute recommends that all clinical professionals are aware of these special tests (physical therapists, physical therapy assistants, chiropractors, occupational therapists, athletic trainers, etc.). The Wainner's Clinical Prediction Rule for Cervical Radiculopathy , and the Cervical Flexion and Rotation Test for cervicogenic headache, are particularly effective for identifying two diagnoses that may be best treated by movement professionals. Additionally, a copy of the Canadian C-spine Rules should be easily accessible for identifying cervical patients with "red flags" who should be referred out for additional testing.

For an Introduction to Special Tests:

• For an introduction to Special Tests including definitions of specific terminology, what special tests measure, accuracy (specificity, sensitivity, reliability, etc.), how we chose the tests in each special test course lessons, and best practice recommendations:
• Special Tests: Introduction

Additional Special Tests for the Cervical Spine:

• Special Tests: Upper Cervical Spine Instability and Vertebrobasilar Insufficiency (VBI)

Pre-approved credits for:

• Integrated Manual Therapist (IMT) Certification

Pre-approved for Continuing Education Credits for:

• Athletic Trainers
• Chiropractors
• Physical Therapists
• Physical Therapy Assistants

This Course Includes:

• AI Tutor
• Text and Illustrations
• Audio Voice-over
• Technique Videos
• Practice Exam
• Pre-approved Final Exam

1. Cook, C., & Hegedus, E. J. (2008). Orthopedic physical examination tests: an evidence-based approach.
2. Dutton, M. (2012). Dutton's Orthopaedic examination, evaluation, and intervention. McGraw-Hill Medical.
3. Magee, D. J. (2013). Orthopedic physical assessment. Elsevier Health Sciences.
   • Spurling's Compression Test
4. Bertilson, B. C., Grunnesjö, M., & Strender, L. E. (2003). Reliability of clinical tests in the assessment of patients with neck/shoulder problems—impact of history. Spine, 28(19), 2222-2231.
5. De Hertogh, W. J., Vaes, P. H., Vijverman, V., De Cordt, A., & Duquet, W. (2007). The clinical examination of neck pain patients: the validity of a group of tests. Manual Therapy, 12(1), 50-55.
6. Sandmark, H., & Nisell, R. (1995). Validity of five common manual neck pain provoking tests. Scandinavian journal of rehabilitation medicine, 27(3), 131-136.
7. Shah, K. C., & Rajshekhar, V. (2004). Reliability of diagnosis of soft cervical disc prolapse using Spurling's test. British journal of neurosurgery, 18(5), 480-483.
8. SPURLING, R. (1944). Lateral rupture of the cervical intervertebral discs: a common cause of shoulder and arm pain. Surg Gynecol Obstet, 78, 350-358.
9. Tong, H. C., Haig, A. J., & Yamakawa, K. (2002). The Spurling test and cervical radiculopathy. Spine, 27(2), 156-159.
10. Uchihara, T., Furukawa, T., & Tsukagoshi, H. (1994). Compression of brachial plexus as a diagnostic test of cervical cord lesion. Spine, 19(19), 2170-2173.
11. Viikari-Juntura, E., Porras, M., & Laasonen, E. M. (1989). Validity of clinical tests in the diagnosis of root compression in cervical disc disease. Spine, 14(3), 253-257.
12. Wainner, R. S., Fritz, J. M., Irrgang, J. J., Boninger, M. L., Delitto, A., & Allison, S. (2003). Reliability and diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examination and patient self-report measures for cervical radiculopathy. Spine, 28(1), 52-62.
13. Shabat, S., Leitner, Y., David, R., & Folman, Y. (2012). The correlation between Spurling test and imaging studies in detecting cervical radiculopathy. Journal of neuroimaging, 22(4), 375-378.
14. Anekstein, Y., Blecher, R., Smorgick, Y., & Mirovsky, Y. (2012). What is the best way to apply the Spurling test for cervical radiculopathy?. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®, 470(9), 2566-2572.
15. Thoomes, E. J., van Geest, S., van der Windt, D. A., Falla, D., Verhagen, A. P., Koes, B. W., … & Vleggeert-Lankamp, C. L. (2018). Value of physical tests in diagnosing cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review. The Spine Journal, 18(1), 179-189.
    • Upper Limb Tension Tests (4, 6, 12, 15)
16. Vanti, C., Bonfiglioli, R., Calabrese, M., Marinelli, F., Violante, F. S., & Pillastrini, P. (2012). Relationship between interpretation and accuracy of the upper limb neurodynamic test 1 in carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics, 35(1), 54-63.
17. Legakis, A., & Boyd, B. S. (2012). The influence of scapular depression on upper limb neurodynamic test responses. Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy, 20(2), 75-82.
18. Nee, R. J., Jull, G. A., Vicenzino, B., & Coppieters, M. W. (2012). The validity of upper-limb neurodynamic tests for detecting peripheral neuropathic pain. journal of orthopaedic & sports physical therapy, 42(5), 413-424.
19. Ghasemi, M., Golabchi, K., Mousavi, S. A., Asadi, B., Rezvani, M., Shaygannejad, V., & Salari, M. (2013). The value of provocative tests in diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy. Journal of research in medical sciences: the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 18(Suppl 1), S35.
    • Distraction Test (4, 11, 12, 15)
    • Wainner's Clinical Prediction Rule for Cervical Radiculopathy (12)
    • Shoulder Abduction Test (11, 12)
20. Davidson, R. I., Dunn, E. J., & Metzmaker, J. N. (1981). The shoulder abduction test in the diagnosis of radicular pain in cervical extradural compressive monoradiculopathies. Spine, 6(5), 441-446.
    • Cervical Flexion and Rotation Test
21. Hall, T., & Robinson, K. (2004). The flexion–rotation test and active cervical mobility—a comparative measurement study in cervicogenic headache. Manual Therapy, 9(4), 197-202.
22. Hall, T. M., Robinson, K. W., Fujinawa, O., Akasaka, K., & Pyne, E. A. (2008). Intertester reliability and diagnostic validity of the cervical flexion-rotation test. Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics, 31(4), 293-300.
23. Ogince, M., Hall, T., Robinson, K., & Blackmore, A. M. (2007). The diagnostic validity of the cervical flexion–rotation test in C1/2-related cervicogenic headache. Manual therapy, 12(3), 256-262.
24. Rubio-Ochoa, J., Benítez-Martínez, J., Lluch, E., Santacruz-Zaragozá, S., Gómez-Contreras, P., & Cook, C. E. (2016). Physical examination tests for screening and diagnosis of cervicogenic headache: A systematic review. Manual therapy, 21, 35-40.
25. Bravo Petersen, S. M., & Vardaxis, V. G. (2015). The flexion–rotation test performed actively and passively: a comparison of range of motion in patients with cervicogenic headache. Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy, 23(2), 61-67.
    • Canadian C-Spine Rules
26. Bandiera, G., Stiell, I. G., Wells, G. A., Clement, C., De Maio, V., Vandemheen, K. L., … & Dreyer, J. (2003). The Canadian C-spine rule performs better than unstructured physician judgment. Annals of emergency medicine, 42(3), 395-402.
27. Stiell, I. G., Clement, C. M., McKnight, R. D., Brison, R., Schull, M. J., Rowe, B. H., … & MacPhail, I. (2003). The Canadian C-spine rule versus the NEXUS low-risk criteria in patients with trauma. New England Journal of Medicine, 349(26), 2510-2518.
28. Stiell, I. G., Wells, G. A., Vandemheen, K. L., Clement, C. M., Lesiuk, H., De Maio, V. J., … & Brison, R. (2001). The Canadian C-spine rule for radiography in alert and stable trauma patients. Jama, 286(15), 1841-1848.
29. Michaleff, Z. A., Maher, C. G., Verhagen, A. P., Rebbeck, T., & Lin, C. W. C. (2012). Accuracy of the Canadian C-spine rule and NEXUS to screen for clinically important cervical spine injury in patients following blunt trauma: a systematic review. Canadian Medical Association Journal, cmaj-120675.
30. Desai, S., Liu, C., Kirkland, S. W., Krebs, L. D., Keto‐Lambert, D., & Rowe, B. H. (2018). Effectiveness of Implementing Evidence‐based Interventions to Reduce C‐spine Image Ordering in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review. Academic Emergency Medicine, 25(6), 672-683.